Op-Ed: Politics trumps geography in Ukraine

Geography is a vengeful deity, and Ukraine is its latest victim. That is the thrust of an argument put forward by renowned journalist Robert Kaplan in his recently published article in Time magazine. Fortunately, the argument is as dubious as it is depressing. Kaplan’s basic theory, previously formulated in his last book, The Revenge of Geography, can be stated very simply: Geography determines politics.

In this March 30, 2014, photo, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, left, is greeted by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at the Russian Ambassador’s Residence to discuss the situation in Ukraine, in Paris. AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, PoolJacquelyn Martin / AP

Geography is a vengeful deity, and Ukraine is its latest victim. That is the thrust of an argument put forward by renowned journalist Robert Kaplan in his recently published article in Time magazine. Fortunately, the argument is as dubious as it is depressing.

Kaplan’s basic theory, previously formulated in his last book, The Revenge of Geography, can be stated very simply: Geography determines politics. We can never break free of the iron rule of geographic conditions. Any attempt to do so must sooner or later backfire, with dire consequences.

Applying his theory to the Ukrainian crisis, Kaplan states, “Ukraine is simply located too far east, and is too spatially exposed to Russia, for it ever to be in the interests of any government in Moscow — democratic or not — to allow Ukraine’s complete alignment with the West.” The Ukrainians’ and Western powers’ failure to heed this geographic truth in their efforts at integrating Ukraine into the European community was, in his view, a critical error. It inevitably provoked Russian aggression against Ukraine, thereby further jeopardizing the latter’s sovereignty while dramatically heightening international tensions and instability, a situation fraught with danger for all.

The statement by Kaplan quoted above, since it is manifestly false, shows the weakness of the general theory underlying it. Let’s suppose Russia were indeed “democratic”, much like, say, today’s Poland or the Czech Republic, both pro-Western liberal democracies. Who can seriously doubt Ukraine would be free to go ahead and align itself with the West, despite its geographical closeness to Russia? Such a prospect would not bother Russia unduly, certainly not enough to make it want to bully Ukraine into steering altogether clear of the European Union.

Clearly, it is above all politics, in particular the politics of a repressive, illiberal, expansionist Russian regime striving to restore by force and fraud the old Soviet sphere of influence, that is wreaking vengeance on Ukraine.

Naturally geography matters. But in human life, politics, i.e., people, their moral and political principles, attitudes and practices, matter as much or even more.

Besides being mistaken, Kaplan’s geography-trumps-politics explanation of the Ukraine crisis is politically pernicious. It lends support to a posture of acquiescence in Putin’s transgressions or a policy of appeasement that a sound, common-sense understanding of the principles of political justice and of the primacy of politics over geography can never accept with a clear conscience.

Aware of it or not, Kaplan has joined a chorus of commentators, like Stephen Cohen and Henry Kissinger, whose arguments reach much the same, morally questionable policy conclusions from different, but equally misguided, premises. In Cohen’s and Kissinger’s view, owing to centuries of shared history and close cultural ties, Russia has (as Kaplan also intimates) a vital national stake in Ukraine. So to placate Russia, they for starters recommend, as does Kaplan implicitly, that Ukraine not be admitted into NATO.

Kaplan, Kissinger, and Cohen alike conveniently overlook how much of that “shared” history consists in oppression of Ukraine by Russia. Remember, too, Ukraine is, by international law, a sovereign country on par with Russia, with its own distinct national interests not necessarily all to the taste of its northern neighbour (a fact Kaplan and Cohen strangely downplay). So, as a matter of right it is for Ukraine to decide, with or without Russia’s consent, whether or not to seek (in consultation with the organization’s members) admission into NATO. Who could blame Ukraine if it wanted to join NATO, given Russia’s incessant transgressions against it? What moral sense would it make to accede to Russia’s opposition to the idea?

Western leaders such as Prime Minister Stephen Harper and President Barack Obama present themselves as champions of international law. Yet a statement by Secretary of State John Kerry following his recent meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov apparently concedes to Russia a significant role in negotiating Ukraine’s new constitution. On what grounds? Well, “Russia obviously has long ties (with) and serious interests (in Ukraine.)” This concession is “dangerous”, as the Washington Post Editorial Board points out, precisely because it contradicts the internationally recognized principle of state sovereignty. And it would again reward Russia for violating international law.

If, citing as our excuse facts of geography or history after the fashion of Kaplan, Kissinger and company, we in the West fail at this and other junctures to stand firmly together in upholding international law, we may as well kiss it goodbye. But then we’d better brace ourselves, for we ourselves will soon have to reckon with the revenge, not of geography (or culture or history), but of politics — a politics of lawless, naked power and aggression, to which Ukraine is already falling prey.

Borys Kowalsky holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from University of Toronto, and is currently a professor of liberal arts at the University Partnership Centre, Georgian College, Barrie, Ontario. He is completing a book on John Stuart Mill on science and religion in modern society for University of Toronto Press. He can be reached at borys.kowalsky@georgiancollege.ca.

This Week's Flyers

Comments

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.